Because it would just be one more corner outfielder plugged into CF. He's about as much of an 8 and Grif was for us last season.

areilly

03-13-2009, 11:52 PM

Why not just shoot me?

Oh come on, you can never have too many slow, past-his-prime players suiting up for a team.

Nellie_Fox

03-14-2009, 01:08 AM

There seems to be an unnatural desire on the part of many Sox fans to see formerly good/great players in a Sox uniform when they're past their prime. It's almost like they think that having those players in a Sox uniform somehow validates their fandom.

CLR01

03-14-2009, 01:58 AM

There seems to be an unnatural desire on the part of many Sox fans to see formerly good/great players in a Sox uniform when they're past their prime. It's almost like they think that having those players in a Sox uniform somehow validates their fandom.

I think some are just convinced that the Sox trainers and coaches can turn around the career of any player (sans Satan). There never seems to be a shortage of "Sign x washed up player that hasn't been healthy in 15 years" threads in the roadhouse.

guillensdisciple

03-14-2009, 03:10 AM

This is a joke right?

I don't want Edmonds anywhere near a White Sox uniform. Ever.

jdm2662

03-14-2009, 09:07 AM

There seems to be an unnatural desire on the part of many Sox fans to see formerly good/great players in a Sox uniform when they're past their prime. It's almost like they think that having those players in a Sox uniform somehow validates their fandom.

I think you are being too hard on the Sox fan base. Considering the team goes this route many times, they've grown accustomed to it. When I was 9, the Sox picked up this pitcher who was God awful. I kept saying for weeks how much he sucked. Until finally, my dad told me he was once an all time great. His name was Steve Carlton... That's just one of many names.

munchman33

03-14-2009, 09:10 AM

Coop'll fix 'em.

rowand33

03-14-2009, 09:16 AM

This is a joke right?

I don't want Edmonds anywhere near a White Sox uniform. Ever.

I'm convinced that over the course of a season he would hit better than Wise/Owens/Anderson and field better than Wise/Owens.

He can't be worse than what we have.

Rocky Soprano

03-14-2009, 09:19 AM

I'm convinced that over the course of a season he would hit better than Wise/Owens/Anderson and field better than Wise/Owens.

He can't be worse than what we have.

Good thing you don't run the team.
There's a reason why he doesn't have a team.

rowand33

03-14-2009, 09:29 AM

Good thing you don't run the team.
There's a reason why he doesn't have a team.

.938 OPS last year with the Cubs. 19 HR and 49 RBI in 250 ABs.

I don't think any of our options for CF can produce at that level.

It's not like this is "give Edmonds 7 MM guaranteed." That would be insane, I agree.

You sign him for the minimum, and if he sucks, you cut him and default to the trash we're planning on throwing out there.

I see it as a no risk move.

WhiteSox1989

03-14-2009, 09:44 AM

No.

Rocky Soprano

03-14-2009, 09:56 AM

.938 OPS last year with the Cubs. 19 HR and 49 RBI in 250 ABs.

I don't think any of our options for CF can produce at that level.

It's not like this is "give Edmonds 7 MM guaranteed." That would be insane, I agree.

You sign him for the minimum, and if he sucks, you cut him and default to the trash we're planning on throwing out there.

I see it as a no risk move.

Explain to me, if he's such a great move, how come no one has signed him?

It's Dankerific

03-14-2009, 10:13 AM

Explain to me, if he's such a great move, how come no one has signed him?

collusion.

rowand33

03-14-2009, 10:54 AM

Explain to me, if he's such a great move, how come no one has signed him?

I can't refute the idea that he isn't signed because he isn't good with any actual evidence, but we all know that teams are going cheaper due to the economy. There are a lot of players that don't have contracts right now that probably should based solely on their abilities.

Everyone's assertion is that the guy can't play anymore; I don't agree with that.

I don't think he went from a .900+ OPS to a guy whose lack of abilities force him into retirement over the course of an offseason.

It's not like signing him would block a promising prospect. It would block AAAA players. And it's not like signing him would cost much. I don't think it's as ridiculous of a suggestion as you guys are making it out to be; we have a gaping hole in CF.

It's not like this is "give Edmonds 7 MM guaranteed." That would be insane, I agree.

You sign him for the minimum, and if he sucks, you cut him and default to the trash we're planning on throwing out there.

I see it as a no risk move.
Wow, I didn't realize he put up those numbers, although I knew he did hit pretty well as a cub. Pro-rate those over a full yr and you have a 40/100 type guy. Then reality hits---he can't likely last a full yr at his age and you'd have to think 2008's numbers would decrease significantly in the AL and he'd be a yr older to boot

Besides didn't he nix a deal w/the Sox a while back? Or did the Sox back out?

guillensdisciple

03-14-2009, 12:46 PM

I'm convinced that over the course of a season he would hit better than Wise/Owens/Anderson and field better than Wise/Owens.

He can't be worse than what we have.

I don't care about that, I just don't think Jim Edmonds should be in a Sox uniform. To me the two don't go well.

Bucky F. Dent

03-14-2009, 10:16 PM

There seems to be an unnatural desire on the part of many Sox fans to see formerly good/great players in a Sox uniform when they're past their prime. It's almost like they think that having those players in a Sox uniform somehow validates their fandom.

I suspect that it exists to some extent with fans of all teams. In much the same way that we are unable to accurately calculate the value of players on the Sox roster (and I count myself amongst this group) we are also unable to accurately calculate when a player who we like is on the wrong side of his prime.

Britt Burns

03-15-2009, 12:05 AM

I suspect that it exists to some extent with fans of all teams. In much the same way that we are unable to accurately calculate the value of players on the Sox roster (and I count myself amongst this group) we are also unable to accurately calculate when a player who we like is on the wrong side of his prime.

you mean like...
Chone Figgins for the 2014 Sox!
Aaron Rowand for the 2017 team!
Carl Crawford in 2022!

gregory18n

03-15-2009, 01:24 AM

I still remember stealing Rocky Colavito when I was a kid. That didn't even work. But Dick Allen wasn't bad.

Billy Ashley

03-16-2009, 06:59 PM

Edmonds can still hit, there is little doubt about that.

However, there is also little doubt hat he's a god awful defender at this point in his career. He should be in LF or RF, not center. He really would have been a good cheap replacement for Pat Burrel for the Phillies, but instead they signed Ibanez well before it became apparent that the the FA market was taking an epic downturn.

My best guess as to why Edmonds is still a FA: Manny Ramirez, Adam Dunn, Patt Burrel, Bobby Abreau, and Raul Ibanez all share the exact same skill set as he does- Good offense, no glove. The other guys are younger/ healthier and better offensive players.

I want to see Edmonds get picked up by someone and make a run at 400 HR. I believe him to be a fringe HoF type, and believe that getting to 400 would at least create a discussion for his candidacy.

Ziggy S

03-17-2009, 06:46 AM

I won't be satisfied until Rudy Law, Tommy Agee, or Ken Berry patrol CF for the South Side once again.

Domeshot17

03-17-2009, 07:33 AM

If we are considering signing Grinderstad part II, then I demand we atleast consider digging up Ted Williams and giving him a look.

russ99

03-17-2009, 08:17 PM

I'm convinced that over the course of a season he would hit better than Wise/Owens/Anderson and field better than Wise/Owens.

He can't be worse than what we have.

Let's just say I'd take any combination of what we have now over Edmonds.

If you think Griffey looked bad for us last season, Edmonds has declined even more from a much lower plateau. Don't let a few wind-blown homers at Wrigley last summer sway you from that fact.

Jim Shorts

03-18-2009, 09:13 AM

Let's just say I'd take any combination of what we have now over Edmonds.

If you think Griffey looked bad for us last season, Edmonds has declined even more from a much lower plateau. Don't let a few wind-blown homers at Wrigley last summer sway you from that fact.

That's just it. Last year we got to hear just how big all of the outfields in the ALC were when we signed Griff. And Griff probably has more range right now than Edmonds.

I'm fine with the BA/DW platoon.

tick53

03-18-2009, 10:10 AM

This is a joke right?

I don't want Edmonds anywhere near a White Sox uniform. Ever.

I agree. We don't need Edmonds at all. The Griffey fiasco was bad enough.

asboog

03-18-2009, 10:20 AM

If we are considering signing Grinderstad part II, then I demand we atleast consider digging up Ted Williams and giving him a look.

Yeah but would Ted Williams body and head be a package deal or would they have separate contracts? :?: :scratch: :redneck

SOXSINCE'70

03-20-2009, 06:26 PM

Why shouldn't the Sox sign Jim Edmonds?

Because he is too friendly with dwarf # 8,
the one nobody ever talks about:

Ouchy. In other words, he's a year long stay on the D.L.
waiting to happen. Thanks,but no thanks.